Brink of Disaster (Part I)
Film opens with montage of scenes of student protest. Credits occur over this sequence.
Loosely structured as a narrative in which John Smith (a college student) is visited by his great great great (etc.) grandfather John Smith (from 1776), this film works to educate a young audience on the "breakdown of moral, religious, and ethical principles" in the US. With the help of a history professor, John Smith (1776) explains how he gave his life to build the USA and nowadays a "bunch of young hooligans" are working to destroy it. Though fairly banal visually (the whole film is set in a library which the "weirdos" have threatened to torch) there are tons of amazing sound bytes regarding student movements (SDS as "students for a dirtier society"), religion, marijuana, sexuality, freedom of speech ("freedom of speech has become freedom of filth"), pornography ("filthy books that no decent people would read"). There is discussion of H. "Rap" Brown (accompanied by archival footage) calling upon student bodies to carry guns. There is also footage and discussion of the riots, burning, and looting done by student activists. The film ends as the student radicals break their way into the library--the image freezes and a title card reads: "will you let this be THE END?".
Drugs Dissent 1960s Social issues Protest Revolution
Subject: Brink of Camp
and authoritarianism. In this sense, the film foreshadows the rise of the religious right and the "answers" it suggests would probably be heartily endorsed by your average Fox News-watching "tea Party" type today.
Subject: Communist threat was real
For the last 55 years, Hollywood, the mainstream media, and leftist college professors (are there any professors that aren't?) have tried to brainwash the public into believing that the anti-communism of the late 40's/early 50's was a "red scare," that is to say, that there was no communist threat outside of the "paranoid fantasies" of "right wing cranks" like the ones so effectively caricatured in Stanley Kubrick's 1964 film Dr. Strangelove. Arthur Miller wrote a play called The Crucible -- now required reading in many schools and universities -- which tried to portray so-called "McCarthyism" as a "witch hunt," again suggesting that there was no communist threat.
Well, communism really was a serious threat and the U.S. government and institutions really were infiltrated by communist agents and sympathizers at the highest levels. The Venona decrypts establish that beyond any reasonable doubt.
Some of you claim to believe in personal freedom and feel the anti-communists were violating the rights of communist traitors; well, go do some reading on how much personal freedom the average Soviet citizen had or read up on the human rights record of communist regimes and tell me if you still feel that way in the morning.
Men like Joseph McCarthy were not only justified, but had a moral obligation, to expose the communist traitors in his midst. I'm all for personal freedom, but not when that freedom is being utilized by conspirators towards the end of imposing a totalitarian regime upon the rest of us. Anyone who says that communism is harmless is either ill-informed, in denial, or is a communist himself spreading disinformation (yes, there are still commies around today, whose favorite pastimes include trying to whitewash the crimes of communist regimes; many of these dirtbags have teaching positions in universities).
Some of you will laugh at what I'm saying; understandable, since you've been conditioned by the mass media to not take claims such as mine seriously. All I can say is, go out and study the facts for yourself -- study the facts about Venona, learn what it was really like to live in the Soviet Union -- and then make up your mind. The public has not been told the truth about these matters by the media or the schools.
Subject: What a terrific movie, although I quit after one minute.
Subject: disgusted for letting "them" do it!
This is not a democracy, it's a bunch of sheep getting sheared to swell the accounts of the few. It's good for a laugh, only this kind of tripe is still going on and will continue until there's nothing left. If you're against righteous and good, then you're a commie! Change commie to terrorist and appeaser and you have the new century.
Also, either you agree with freedom of speech or you don't. There is no middle ground. They skim over this issue for obvious reasons.
Of course, nowadays we would love to have these people in power as they would to the left of the current administration.
The history prof argues for "religious values". What kind of history prof is that? Then he goes on to defend science, ignoring that science is totally incompatible with religious superstition.
There are so many rightwing incoherences in this film that it is indeed very campy. Unfortunately it is religious fascist camp.
Subject: Why Do You Find Film This Offensive?
Subject: The hidden sequel....
Jerry Fairbanks productions "Tragedy or Hope."
Put these two films together, and you will see why everything in this country is so f@#$ed.
Subject: Brink of Disaster too preachy.
Subject: Laniesha's Final review
Some of the traditional values that were pointed out by the older main characters had distinct merit. The example that some people only like to mention the Constitution or law when it suits them, but on many other aspects want to tear it down. There were lots of things that the traditional ideas were being challenged on by the present changes they were against.
The film seem to point out that older generations do not feel free speech was created so young people could go around saying some of the things that they say. The young John Smith attempted to defend some of the things being said by his generation. If one is to really think about it, free speech was really created so people could say things that others might not like. How else do you challenge ideas, that might be wrong or out dated?
As the two sides of the generation gap debated about the past being trampled by the present, each wondered what the future would hold. Is the future doomed because of the restrictions of the past or is it ill fated by the liberal actions of the present? This seemed to be an age old discussion.
I enjoyed what I thought to be the point of the film. I really liked the fact that film leaves you hanging as to what was going to happened once the door was opened. I think the locked door with the past and present on one side and future on the other was a brilliant way of demonstrating the metaphor of uncertainty about the future.
Subject: VCC Review of Brink of Disaster
Though this film is out of date, it probably tackled many current events of the time that it was created. Things like hippies and the SDS were scary to many adults and educators and they wanted to help mold the minds of the younger generation who looked up to them. I donÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt know how much of an effect this might have had on the younger generation because while they were playing devilÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs advocate they were giving the young kids lots of ammunition to argue the points of the rebels. Also, while they were arguing about drugs, Johnny lit up a joint and continued on with the conversation which isnÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt really a good anti-drug message. There were good points made, and some good scare tactics which probably affected many of the young people watching it, but since most of those topics arenÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt a real threat to todayÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs society, it wouldnÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt be as scary now.
HUM 2250 - W18
Subject: Founding fathers and society then and now
Subject: Chablis Everett Brink of Disaster
Subject: Message everyone should be aware of
They both get interrupted by a history teacher, Mr. Harden. This man is strongly opinionated about our government and tries to knock some sense into johnÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs head. Mr. Harden is defending not only the pre-med books, but all other books in the library including environmental, law books as well. He is kind of paranoid because he thinks that the hippies that are outside looting the streets might break in the library and vandalize it. He strongly suggests that you donÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂt have to own property to have property rights in it. He thinks that freedom of speech is freedom of filth because of all the people that are abusing the system. People always have to take things to the next level. This teacher is trying to make him see all the corruption that has taken over in our country and his ghost is there to represent all of the hard work and dedication they Americans went through to fight for our country to make it what it should be today. One story the professor told that impacted me was when he said that there a guy that was at the top of a roof and he was going to commit suicide and people all over were yelling ÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂjump-jumpÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ and he finally did. I pictured that story so well when they were telling it and it was so horrible. He called everyone who was yelling ÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂmurderersÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ (which in my opinion were!)
I completely agree with the professor in many ways. ItÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs people like John, which are taking this country to complete extremes. I think it all started when a man decided to sue the schools for saying the pledge of allegiance and then went on in taking the ÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂUnder GodÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ words out. Now it seems that saying ÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂChristmas treeÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ is inappropriate and itÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs now referred to as ÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂHoliday treeÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂ which is so ridiculous!!! We have so many rights but there are always those people that are extremist who have nothing better to do then to take these privileges we all call rights and abuse it as far as we can go. I think this movie was a bit boring because itÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂÃÂs an old film but it ha a really good message that everyone should hear.
Subject: Scare Tactics
Here we have John Smith, a college student and Vietnam veteran, holed up in a library trying to finish writing his paper on turtles. The library is under siege by a radical student group and he's armed with a baseball bat. (How stupid is John?) It's in the library where he meets his ghost of an ancestor from colonial times who lectures him on the values our country was founded on. Then his history professor comes in and lectures him on decaying American values, etc. (How stupid is this professor to come into a library which is probably going to be set on fire?) Further, both John and his professor have accepted the fact and make it seem perfectly normal that they're talking to a ghost. The ghost is the only smart one because he can't be hurt in a fire.
The professor really seems angry, which makes him preachy and boring to listen to. He basically says our right to freedom of speech is only a right if we're not dissenting. Sex outside of marriage is wrong. (As if this didn't happen until the sixties.) He ranted about a lot more, and didn't fail to mention that it was communism that was undermining America's moral and religious principles. (Were we really that afraid of the communists back then?)
The film REALLY lost my interest, though, when the professor basically said hippies were SDS members and they were the ones who were going to burn the library. SDS stands for Students for a Democratic Society which was a militant and often violent student group. The hippie movement was NOT the same as SDS. Again, it was just another scare tactic the film maker was trying to use. But for me, if they can't get their facts straight, I just can't listen.
Subject: Your cess pool Amerika
Its obvious the communist have taken Amerika from with-in just as the video explains how to destroy America and it was done, and as the man asked what do they have to offer....This cess pool called amerika of today is the answer.
One who has been indoctrinated (As it was called back then "Re-education camps) into communism as the previous posters have,they will never know what the truth really is.....And they don't.
Exactly what the professor was warning about has happened in amerika. Thats what is called "Truth".
What a ugly,nasty,filthy country it is today.
If you have not seen this video...attempt to open your mind beyond the communism propaganda of the previous posters and learn what they are saying back then and look around you and see the truth.
The new-age of greed,lust,money is god and all the filth these creatures have created.
Think....Is it better? Is it "really" a world you like to live in? Or is it a world of drugs,me,me,me,money,money,money and screw you.
What I found most disturbing about this film, though, was the professor's attack on free speech, or as he calls it, "filth speech." According to his logic, freedom of speech needs to be curtailed in order to save America. He also shows contempt towards the Constitution.
I know these were just actors, but you could see a real, palpable ANGER behind their conservative point of view. They really did believe what they were preaching.
Rating: 5 stars for humor and campiness. 1 star for its lack of any reasoned arguments.
Subject: Brink of Disaster (Full Film)
Ratings: Camp/Humor Value: ****. Weirdness: ***. Historical Interest: ****. Overall Rating: ****.
Subject: beckoning to a silent majority
The underlying message is for all Americans on the fence to wake up and fight back against the radicals. The colonist claimed that 60s revolutionaries only want to destroy what generations worked to build. He describes a mythical early America, where people had family and religion, and he proclaimed that the belief in God is the core difference between then and now.
The medical school student defended human rights over property rights, and a constitutional right to dissent. The history professor attempted to deny this argument, claiming the "right of dissent is not the right to destroy," and that "freedom of speech is a beautiful concept that is deliberately fouled up" and has become "freedom of filth." And this "filth," embodied by the barbarian "Students for a Dirty Society" (SDS) at the gates, is at war with the so-called decent people for America's future. The history professor then claimed that smut, free sex, indecent films and the like were all part of a plot by international communism to undemine America's moral, ethics and religious principles and destroy it from the inside.
The division of America into decent people and dirty people is extremely crude, and ignores any of the legitimate grievances people had in the 60s. The struggle over civil rights and war in Vietnam is almost entirely ignored, and demonstrators were reduced to caricatures of hippie revolutionaries and black rioters. Americans of the past are naively presented as wholly moral, upstanding citizens, whose decendents are under siege by well-organized SDS cadres. This film overestimates the cohesion and strength of student organizations in the 1960s, and its sheer unbelievability and endless speechmaking makes it unlikely to have moved anyone from the silent majority to militant defenders of the status quo.
Subject: commies controll smut peddling hippies hell bent on destroying college librarys and expensive medical equipement!!!
managing to tag a wide range of social ills
on the commie controlled "wierdos" whose idea of
dissenting is 'in reality' an attempt at destroying america from within ...
while this was never fully explained, from this film one might conclude the hippies harboured a blind hated for america because of an irrational
need to destroy it out of love for commie russia and red china; countrys, we're continualy reminded, the hippies supposedly admired for some reason
something rather odd that occurred in this film was while the history teacher/establishment figure was denouncing dissenters, he seemlessly
merged into a diatribe about how dissenters are
killed (if that's what he meant by making a slashing motion across his neck) in communist parts of the world ... in a way it almost comes off as if this guy would rather prefer communist views on dissent because of the heavy handed attitude he has of hippies, which in effect indirectly underminds the message of american freedom-
also, the authoritarian figure proposes hippies would destroy pricey hospial equipement in their bid to (you guessed it) destroy america, a bizare
suggestion to say the least; it was also insisted that hippies are fundamentaly bad because they "have no need for God", a sentiment that seems to ignore the fact that
their grievences were with the US Govt, not God-
Subject: Whose side are you on?
Subject: Brink of Disaster